assessing lawyer traits & finding a fit for...

Assessing Lawyer Traits & Finding a Fit for Success | page 1 All Rights Reserved

A WHITEPAPER FROM JD MATCH & THE RIGHT PROFILE

Assessing Lawyer Traits & Finding a Fit for Success

Introducing the Sheffield Legal Assessment

Mark Levin Co-Founder The Right Profile, LLC Bruce MacEwen President Adam Smith, Esq. & JD Match For more information: The Right Profile Phone (773) 977-8272 Email [email protected] Web therightprofile.com

JD Match Phone: (212) 866-2630 Email: [email protected] Web: JDMatch.com

mailto:[email protected]

http://therightprofile.com/

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.jdmatch.com/


Table of Contents

I. Introduction...page 3

II. Purpose & Methodology...page 5

III. Conclusions...page 7

IV. Detailed Findings...page 10

V. Appendix...page 17

About JD Match

About The Right Profile

Services Available from the Sheffield Legal Assessment

Acknowledgements


I. Introduction

The legal industry is in crisis, but problems run far deeper than the well-publicized flattened demand for

legal work. Although it is certainly true that corporate America’s enhanced scrutiny of legal spend and

“value seeking” are limiting top line revenue for the Am Law 250 and NLJ 350, the costs of attorney

recruiting and attrition are taking an ever-increasing toll on each firm’s bottom line. The nation’s largest law

firms spend billions of dollars each year to recruit, train, and ultimately lose lawyers from their ranks.

The current system for law firm recruiting and attorney

development is broken. Just like the incorporation of

Sabermetrics in professional baseball helped teams with

significantly smaller budgets compete with the likes of the New

York Yankees, forward thinking law firms will look beyond the

hiring metrics that have always been used to new information

and data that can help them win and lower their costs - filling

their ranks with attorneys that fit better culturally and matching

those attorneys to practice groups, mentoring, cross-selling and

attorney development programs that best fit with each individual

lawyer’s traits and interests. Early adopters of a better

recruiting and development system will prosper - like the 2002

Oakland Athletics (the focus of the Moneyball book and movie),

those firms will produce greater wins at a lower cost, which in

this case will be lower turnover, stronger firm culture, greater attorney mentoring and development and,

ultimately, better client service, all while pushing more money to the firm’s bottom line.

The importance of talent at law firms cannot be overstated. It is the “supply” of what is “sold” to meet client

demands. A firm’s talent is synonymous with the quality and capabilities of a firm. Firms are not selling a

product or service that can be produced by a fungible group of people. High law firm turnover (caused in

large part by hiring decisions based upon little more than the law school attended, grades in school, a short

unstructured interview process and, in the case of lateral attorneys, an uncorroborated book of business)

coupled with high recruiting and replacement costs create a staggering annual cost of more than $25 million

for a 400 attorney firm. Separate conversations with two Am Law 10 executives that live with these

numbers on a daily basis peg the $400K replacement cost (cited below) as less than half of their true costs

(e.g., they both use a number higher than $800K as a cost for each experienced attorney position that

needs to be filled due to turnover), so recognize that the figures on the next page are conservative.

“If you believe, as we do,

that this data has

predictive ability, then

you’re in an arms race to

learn it and take

advantage of it.”

Sig Mejdal

Director for Decision Sciences

Houston Astros


Monetary Cost

$250,000 cost to recruit one 1st year associate1

$400,000 cost to firm when an associate leaves2

17% annual attorney attrition rate for law firms3

46% entry-level associates leave law firm within 3 years4

81% entry-level associates leave law firm within 5 years5

43% lateral hires lose money6

_____________________________________________________________________

$25 Million+ annual cost of attrition for 400-attorney firm7

Although a certain level of attrition is built into the large law firm business model and is seen as necessary

or “wanted” attrition, NALP consistently reports that around 50% of all departures are unwanted by the law

firm. It is also significant to note that the reasoning behind more than half of the departures relates to an

improper fit between the attorney and the firm, job role and/or practice area8.

From the attorney’s perspective, law firms have become increasingly more stressful places to work,

particularly for newer attorneys. One key reason is that the days of a defined and definite partnership track

have all but vanished and have been replaced by a near-constant concern for job security. The demand to

build a book of business earlier and earlier in one’s career adds to the stress. The lack of ‘fit’ that leads to

many lawyers leaving a firm to take work at another also leads to a very high attrition rate from the practice

of law altogether. A NALP report and MIT study provide the following data9:

Human Cost

57% Lawyers leave law firms altogether before their 5th year of practice

31% Female associates leave private practice altogether after leaving their law firm

18% Male associates leave private practice altogether after leaving their law firm

1 The annual mad dash for fresh talent is under way again — is this any way to recruit associates?, American Lawyer, August 2007

2 The Female Lawyer Exodus, The Daily Beast, July 31, 2013.

3 Keeping the Keepers III: Mobility & Management of Associate Talent, NALP Foundation 2014

4 2007 NALP Update on Associate Attrition; includes both entry-level and lateral associates

5 2007 NALP Update on Associate Attrition; includes both entry-level and lateral associates

6 2013 Hildebrandt/Citi Client Advisory

7 400 attorneys x 17% annual attrition = annual churn of 68 attorneys x $400,000 = $27,200,000 annual attrition cost

8 See generally, The NALP Foundation for Law Career Research and Education's annual Update on Associate Attrition, years 2007-

2014 9 Sweeney, Marlisse Silver. “The Female Lawyer Exodus”, The Daily Beast, July 31, 2013.

http://www.mlaglobal.com/community/news/mla-nalp-foundation-announce-study-report-of-law-firm-hiring-and-retention-2006-to-2011


The lack of fit within a firm, practice or law altogether also manifests itself in other ways, namely:

• A large percentages of attorneys (majorities in some studies), would not become lawyers if they

could make the choice again.10

• A similarly large pool of current attorneys counsel college graduates to look at other professions

instead of law.11

• Lawyers suffer nearly quadruple the clinical depression rates of the average occupation, easily the

highest of any occupation studied.12

• Including depression and substance abuse, more than 30% of attorneys qualify for mental health

intervention.13

II. Purpose & Methodology

In early 2014, The Right Profile and JD Match set out on an

ambitious project to learn if it might be possible to reduce the

high costs of turnover, both monetary and human, in the legal

industry. We dared to posit: What if we could determine the

best fit work setting(s) and practice area(s) for individual

attorneys and law students based upon their personality trait

combinations & preferences? Imagine what would that do to

attorney job satisfaction and productivity if we could accomplish

this. On the other side of the hiring equation, what if we could

determine which attorney candidates-for-hire would fit in with the culture at the firm, service their clients well

and grow in their roles? Imagine what that would that do to law firm attrition rates. Imagine further how

much value this service would provide to the legal industry, to firms (and their respective profits), the

lawyers that work there and the clients that depend on them.

To answer these bold questions, we started with the Sheffield Legal Assessment -- the legal industry’s first

online trait assessment purpose-built for lawyers. It is industry-specific – created by a team of

psychologists, consultants and attorneys in Chicago after nearly 18 months of primary and secondary

research to determine which traits play a role in attorney success, career longevity and overall satisfaction

levels in law. Creating an assessment from scratch was necessary because generally available instruments

tend to clump lawyers together in similar groups (e.g. the assessed person looks generally like other

attorneys, as opposed to doctors, sales people, etc.), limiting more meaningful, nuanced analysis. In March

of 2014 we launched the Attorney Trait Assessment & Profile Study with the goal of building a broad

database of attorneys that reflects the full range of career choices made by law school graduates and the

attitudes, career satisfaction levels and personalities that accompany those decisions. We made the

10

Christison, Randall B. “Burnout: A Necessary Part of Lawyers Lives?” Wolf Management Consultants, n.d. www.wolfmotivation.com/articles/burnout-a-necessary-part-of-lawyers-lives 11

Personal observations based upon six years working in law firms, and informal poll results in “Attorney Offers Students 1000 Reasons to Skip Law School,” Forbes, December 22,2013. <www.forbes.com/sites/kellyphillipserb/2013/12/22/attorney-offers-students-1000-reasons-to-skip-law-school/> 12

Christison, Randall B. “Burnout: A Necessary Part of Lawyers Lives?” Wolf Management Consultants, n.d. 13

Id.

“[W]hat if we could

determine which

attorney candidates-for-

hire would fit in with the

culture at the firm,

service clients well and

reliably work hard?”

http://www.attorneyassessment.com/

http://www.wolfmotivation.com/articles/burnout-a-necessary-part-of-lawyers-lives


Sheffield Legal Assessment publicly available to anyone (attorneys and non-attorneys alike) who wanted to

take part in our study, and then worked with a select group of law schools, bar associations and legal

publications to promote the study and drive participation rates. We also spent countless hours verifying the

job status and career paths of every attorney participant, and dropped records from the study when

participant data could not be verified through internet searches, LinkedIn or law firm websites.

We recently completed an analysis of the first wave of the assessments completed by 1432 individuals

including attorneys, former attorneys, law students and non-attorneys from across the United States and in

various stages of their careers. This analysis included examining which traits relate to their longevity as

lawyers and their satisfaction levels, in the general practice of law plus in specific practice areas and work

settings. A partial breakdown of the participant population is as follows:

Participant Breakdown Attorney Trait Assessment & Profile Study

973 Practicing Attorneys

95 Non-Practicing Attorneys

225 Law Students

139 Non-Attorneys (never attorneys)

1,432 Total Participants

744 Female

688 Male

Attorney Participants’ Employer Breakdown Attorney Trait Assessment & Profile Study

69% Law Firms

17% Government

9% Corporate

3% Not-for-Profit

2% Education

505 different law firms

48 of the Am Law 50 law firms

83 of the Am Law 100 law firms

Through our analysis of this data and continued study of attorney traits and success metrics, we hope to

achieve a number of specific goals for the legal industry, including the following:

● Help answer “Is law school right for me?” - the $164,000 question - before a potential student

incurs the investment in time, LSAT preparation and tuition costs.


● Help law school career services offices better place their students by giving them the tools to

better understand their students and help decide what career paths might be a better fit for them.

● Help law students and lawyers better understand themselves and their strengths, including

how those translate to fit for work environment and practice area.

● Help law firms achieve lower turnover and higher profits by finding candidates that fit better with

a firm and individual practice groups, and aiding firms in better developing, training, mentoring and

ultimately retaining more of the people they want to keep.

III. Conclusions

1. The attorney hiring process for nearly all law firms is painfully antiquated, and it costs the legal

industry roughly $9.1 billion annually for the turnover that it produces in just the 400 largest firms in

the United States.14

a. Law firms still interview for new associates at the same schools (largely chosen by the fact

that “the firm has always hired from this school” or someone giving input for the decision of

where to recruit is an alum. Firms miss the obvious truth that it is not the graduates of those

schools generally, but select individuals from those schools that may one day help grow the

firm’s business. Firms need better tools to find and evaluate future stars.

b. Despite clear failure of the system given the numbers above, law firms employ the same

metrics (GPA, school attended, law review or moot court participation and a brief impression

of the person from series of short, unstructured interviews) that they have always used, even

though these metrics have no true correlation to success within a firm setting.15

c. Metrics for lateral hires are even murkier, but the stakes are significantly higher and failure is

similarly frequent.16

14

This calculation uses the following statistics (cited elsewhere in this document) and assumptions:

Turnover rate: 17% Large law firms: Roughly 134,000 total attorneys* Estimated cost to replace attorney: $400,000 Turnover cost (17% x 134,000 x $400,000) = $9,112,000,000 annually ($9.1B)

* See generally, Law360 Reveals 400 Largest US Law Firms by Jake Simpson (March 23, 2014) for individual firms and attorney numbers included in this calculation. Further, the NALP turnover statistics include firms of “100 and fewer lawyers,” when c iting the 17% attrition rate, which would suggest that we could include significantly more attorneys in our turnover cost calculation. Along those lines, our belief is that the 17% attrition number is probably applicable to firms of fifty or more attorneys. The Lawyer Statistical Report (1994, 2004, 2012 editions), by the American Bar Foundation, shows that roughly 20% of attorneys in private practice in 2005 were in firms of 51 or more attorneys, so the resulting number of attorneys in this segment, using the most recent numbers provided by the ABF document, is roughly 190,200. That number would result in annual turnover costs of nearly $13 billion.

15

“[A]cademic performance is not necessarily a proxy for work performance. In 2000 Kansas City, Missouri-based Blackwell Sanders Peper Martin did a study to see how well grades predicted professional success. The firm compared each of its associates’ grades, class rank, and school rank to their evaluations and accomplishments at the firm. Blackwell found that neither law school rank nor class rank could determine who would become a standout lawyer.” The annual mad dash for fresh talent is under way again — is this any way to recruit associates?, American Lawyer, August 2007 16

Bodine, Larry. “Lateral Hire Attrition Rate: 30% in Three Years, 44% After Five”. LawMarketing Blog, Feb. 15, 2011. http://blog.larrybodine.com/2011/02/articles/marketing/lateral-hire-attrition-rate-30-in-three-years-44-after-five/

http://www.law360.com/articles/518950/law360-reveals-400-largest-us-law-firms

http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/administrative/market_research/lawyer_demographics_2013.authcheckdam.pdf

http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/administrative/market_research/lawyer_demographics_2013.authcheckdam.pdf

http://blog.larrybodine.com/2011/02/articles/marketing/lateral-hire-attrition-rate-30-in-three-years-44-after-five/


2. Although roughly 80% of the Fortune 500 and 89% of the Fortune 100 companies use psychometric

assessments in their hiring process, law firms are loath to modernize their ways. Less than 5% of

the Am Law 250 currently uses assessments during the hiring process, and none uses instruments

purpose-built for the legal profession.

a. Understanding the attorney candidate’s mental makeup would not only help the firm better

determine fit for the firm overall, but also for specific practice areas and roles within the firm.

b. This is particularly relevant as firms invest in business development and coaching.

Deploying resources on those attorneys that have no natural predisposition to sales (e.g.

they are highly introverted, have not developed a broad network of friends and business

contacts, prefer to avoid situations that can lead to rejection, prefer to blend in over feeling

comfortable in a spotlight) will be counter-productive. Similar issues will occur when moving

attorneys to management or client facing roles when their skills lie elsewhere.

c. Although the diagram below is simplified, a trait analysis allows firms to better understand the

intangibles that are key to success in a law firm or other legal setting.

3. Many attorneys fall into their practice areas based upon the needs of the firm that first hires them.

Although this may be advantageous in the short term for a firm, it is costly in the long run. Lawyers


that don’t “fit” with their practice area, practice group or culture of the firm may often leave. It is not

that the attorney can’t do the job; it is more akin to a right-handed person having to perform tasks

day in and day out with her left hand – slower, frustrating and potentially sloppy.

a. Certain trait patterns correlate with satisfaction and longevity in certain practice areas. In

other words, there are trait patterns that are indicative of “fit” within certain practice areas.

Understanding this information will help law firms better evaluate, develop and mentor their

attorneys based upon intangibles that would otherwise be missed in a traditional recruiting

process.

b. This information will also be useful in helping law students focus their studies in areas for

which they have a natural “fit” based upon the known trait patterns of various practice

groups.

4. Similar to the ‘profile’ for a practice area, certain trait patterns fit better in certain work settings (large

firms, small firms, government, corporate, etc.).

5. The answer to lower overall law firm hiring costs is simple – hire better, develop your people and put

them in roles where they will have the best chance to succeed, and, as a result, keep the most

desirable people longer.

6. The practice of law is not for everyone, and peaks in some traits tie to higher career dissatisfaction

levels and shorter tenures in law firms or the practice of law altogether. This information can be

helpful for prospective law students in helping them determine if their trait profile matches known

satisfaction or dissatisfaction profiles of current attorneys. If someone looks like a good fit for law,

trait profiles can also help steer a student’s studies toward certain practice areas.


IV. Detailed Findings

1. Attorneys are different Most attorneys tend to believe that they are different than “non-attorneys,” and our results

corroborate that belief in multiple traits. As compared to non-attorneys:

a. Attorneys tended to prefer more straight-forward solutions in problem solving as opposed to

“thinking outside the box.”

b. Attorneys tend to default to logic and critical thinking when making a decision and are less

likely to “trust their gut.”

c. Attorneys are more likely to avoid situations where they may be rejected or criticized. This

trait is often tied to difficulties in business development.

There is also a clear profile of trait markers for those attorneys that choose to leave the practice of

law altogether after working in their first law firm role; higher levels of resilience, empathy, initiative

and sociability are among the traits where these attorneys differ from those lawyers who continue to

stay in the practice of law.

Abstraction Creativity Ego Strength Logical

Tra

it Inte

nsity →

Key Trait Differences

Attorneys

Non Attorneys

Resiliency Empathy Initiative Sociability

Tra

it In

ten

sity

→

"Non-fit for Law" Attorney Profile: Key Trait Markers

Still practicing at initial law firm

Left initial law firm & left practice of law


2. Each practice area has its own trait pattern profile There is also a profile for each practice area we assessed. For example, practitioners in some

practice areas exhibit a high tendency toward creative, “out of the box” solutions and have a

preference for teamwork and group problem solving. Other practice areas are quite the opposite, or

differ in a few key traits:

a. M&A practitioners show a clear preference for straightforward solutions to problems that

follow a predictable path, though they have more comfort with risk than any other group

assessed.

b. Trust & Estate attorneys exhibit the lowest preferences for teamwork and group problem

solving. This group also is the most introverted of the practice groups assessed.

c. Bankruptcy practitioners spiked in a number of traits, including empathy, curiosity and logical

decision-making. Bankruptcy was also the most pessimistic of the groups assessed by a

large margin.

Firms and younger attorneys would both benefit if individuals were matched to practice areas based

upon traits and preferences as opposed to firm needs, as this will increase an attorney’s overall

cultural fit and satisfaction and should decrease attrition.

Trai

t In

tensity

Key Trait Differences in Select Practice Areas

Mergers & Acquisitions

Bankruptcy

Trust & Estates


3. Each law firm has its own cultural profile We also found “cultural” profiles at the law firm level. Two law firms promoted the study within their

firm which resulted in significant numbers of attorneys from each firm participating in the

assessment. One firm has more than 600 attorneys worldwide and is one of the 75 largest law firms

in the United States according to The American Lawyer rankings. Significantly, thirty members of

their management committee took the assessment. The other firm is a general practice mid-sized

law firm with offices located in the Midwest, focused on middle-market clients. The results from

each group of attorneys showed definite trait pattern profiles that were discernible from each other

and the overall law firm attorney averages. It appears that identifiable law firm profiles result from

“cultural” differences at the law firm / organizational level. Distinguishable findings for these two

firms were as follows:

a. The management committee of the Am Law ranked firm was found to be significantly more

optimistic, trusting & sociable than the norm of all law firms. This triple trait pattern is a

tangible cultural “marker” for this firm (assuming that the management committee members

represent the overall culture of the firm).

b. The Am Law firm also scored higher in the two empathy traits making this a second cultural

marker for the firm.

c. The mid-sized firm showed a strong preference for a concrete thinking style (as opposed to

outside of the box) which correlates with the firm’s strong M&A, Finance and Trust & Estates

practices.

Profiles at the law firm level could be leveraged in recruiting and hiring to measure cultural fit

between a law firm and prospective attorney candidates-for-hire. Proactive law firms could actively

recruit candidates based upon the law firm’s cultural profile. Law firm profiles might also be helpful

in understanding the firm’s cultural gaps for firm management purposes. For example, if a particular

law firm or practice group tested low in a trait such as teamwork, firm management could proactively

facilitate team-building activities and exercises that foster better collaboration and teamwork at the

firm or practice group level.

Tra

it Inte

nsity →

Law Firm Cultural Profiles - Key Traits

Mid-size firm

AmLaw firm

All law firm attorneys


Finally, law firm profiles would be helpful in analyzing cultural compatibility and discovering potential

friction points between two law firms considering a merger. Using law firm profiles for merger

analysis and due diligence could prove to be exceptionally valuable in this era where mergers are

more frequent, involve larger and larger firms and sometimes are even critical to a firm’s ongoing

survival.

4. Differences in traits & satisfaction by generation exist in the attorney population

Baby Boomers (law school graduates from 1970-1989) appear to be more predisposed to group

problem solving and slightly more extroverted than Gen X (law school graduates from 1990-2009)

and Millennials (law school graduates from 2010-2014). Boomers tended to be much more positive

overall, scoring lower in pessimism and skepticism, and exhibited the highest career satisfaction of

the groups. Millennials were found to prefer guidance in work situations whereas Baby Boomers

and Gen X were more autonomous.

Tra

it Inte

nsity →

Key Trait Differences by Generation

Baby Boomers

Gen X

Millenials

60%

65%

70%

75%

80%

85%

90%

Intellectually Challenged

Social Impact Work / Life Balance

Overall Satisfaction

Satisfa

ction L

evel

Generational Career Satisfaction

Baby Boomers

Gen X

Millenials


5. Career Satisfaction

Law firm size is generally correlated with career satisfaction, with the lowest work/life balance scores

reported by attorneys working at the largest firms (501+ attorneys). Size of firm was also inversely

correlated with perceived social impact.

Career satisfaction also varies by practice area, with Finance practitioners finding the lowest

work/life balance and IP practitioners feeling the most intellectually challenged.

50%

55%

60%

65%

70%

75%

80%

85%

90%

Intellectually Challenged

Social Impact Work / Life Balance

Overall Satisfaction

Satisfa

ction L

evel

Attorney Satisfaction Levels Law Firms by Size

501+ Attorneys

151-500 Attorneys

26-150 Attorneys

1-25 Attorneys


6. Impediments to Business Development

Our data suggests that most Am Law 250 firms, and

particularly those in the 150-500 attorney range, are

struggling to build a collaborative environment. Here

is why traits matter, and why a more collaborative

firm is going to win at the end of the day: Although

all law firms tend to struggle with practice group silos

and lack of cross-selling, most Am Law 250 firms,

and particularly those in the 150-500 attorney range

show attorney trait patterns that look particularly

prone to siloed practices and siloed business

development. Attorney assessments from firms this size showed the strongest preferences for

working alone on issues and individual problem solving even where issues might be outside the

attorney’s practice area. Coupled with higher introversion and higher self-sufficiency than other firms,

these traits will strengthen silos and limit collaboration. If the quickest route to building new business is

to sell more services to existing clients (cross-selling), then larger firms will struggle because most of

their attorneys are basically wired to fail at this activity; the vast majority of attorneys at these firms

and the pervasive firm culture in this segment would prefer to work alone and build business alone.

So how does this play out for growth and business development at these firms? Not all that well.

Nearly every law firm is looking to grow its business in a legal market that shows little growth in overall

demand for legal services, and almost everyone of these firms are following the same two paths

towards perceived growth, namely (1) buying new business (growth through lateral hiring) and (2)

business development coaching for the firm’s current attorneys. Each method has its flaws and the

flaws are magnified once you better understand the cultural overlay.

For lateral hires, firms try to evaluate a prospective hire’s portable book of business. That term,

“portable book of business” is both aptly named and misleading; based on personal experience and

discussions with numerous firms, the term is misleading in that the “portable book” is rarely as

portable or as large as is anticipated by either the lateral attorney or the firm that is hiring. Where the

term is correct, however, is that most of the business will leave when the lateral attorney leaves the

firm (which is a staggeringly common event).17 In that way, the new business that is purchased with

the acquisition of a new lateral attorney is more like a rental than a purchase. The odds of any

business staying with the hiring firm further decreases when you consider the cultural overlay of most

Am Law 250 firms; if the mindset is to work in silos and grow business individually, then it is unlikely

that any business from new clients introduced to the firm will ever be retained since the client’s

exposure to the new firm may not extend much past new letterhead and payment addresses. Recent

17

See generally, An Empirical Analysis of Lateral Lawyer Trends from 2000 to 2007: The Emerging Equilibrium for Corporate Law Firms, William D. Henderson & Leonard Bierman, The Georgetown Journal of Legal Ethics, Vol 22:1395. and A Closer Look at Lateral Hiring, abovethelaw.com, January 31, 2013

“If the quickest route to building

new business is to sell more

services to existing clients (cross-

selling), then larger firms will

struggle because most of their

attorneys are basically wired to fail

at this activity.”


research confirms the end result, showing no statistically significant relationship between more lateral

partner hiring and higher profits.18

The second path, business development

coaching, may be similarly problematic in the

way that it is currently used. Although business

development coaching can be effective for many

attorneys, firms on the whole are often frustrated

and feel that they are not getting full value from

their investment. And these are not small

investments. A survey by The BTI Consulting

Group of Boston found that 85% of law firms

offer formal sales and business development

training to their lawyers,19 and a separate survey

found that, on average, 50 percent of partners

and 46 percent of associates receive sales

training, generally conducted on-site by either colleagues or outside consultants.20 Significant sums of

money are being invested - according to the 2011 Benchmarking Law Firm Marketing and Business

Development survey conducted by the BTI Consulting Group, business development training was

approximately 12.5 percent of a typical law firm’s marketing/business development budget in 2011.21

Problems arise quickly for most professional services firms, because marketing and business

development spending does not yield immediate, identifiable results. This is not to say that coaching

does not work - to the contrary, it is definitely useful for many attorneys in building their book of

business (just ask any one of the thousands of companies and individuals that offer such services).

Where the disconnect arises is that it will be much more useful for some attorneys than others. Coach

an attorney with trait patterns that align with strength in business development, and you will likely see

natural success and some enjoyment of the process. On the other side, if the attorney is more

introverted and has a high fear of rejection, the process will quickly become a burden and the

likelihood of any return on the coaching investment will be low.

Back to our Moneyball analogy from the start of this paper, we have an enormous number of law firms

taking the New York Yankees approach - spending whatever it takes to get a winning team. Although

this may work in the short run, other firms will take the Oakland A’s approach and spend smarter,

leaving more money for profit. As that shift happens, talent at the Yankees approach firms may more

seriously consider a move to firms that are performing well while spending less, and increasing their

bottom line profits per partner. The law firms taking the Oakland A’s approach will certainly be happy

to add the talent if it fits with their culture and strategy. If not, money will be better spent growing and

retaining their farm team (their younger associates).

18

Dangerous Advice for Law Firm Leaders, Steven J. Harper, The Belly of the Beast, May 21, 2014, citing www.americanlawyer.com/id=1202639515457/Is-Reliance-on-Lateral-Hiring-Destabilizing-Firms 19

BTI’s Benchmarking Law Firm Marketing and Business Development Strategies, released October 2008 20

Incisive Legal Intelligence Fifth Annual Law Firm Business Development Practices Survey, released July 22, 2009 21

http://www.ilw.com/articles/2011,0107-bodine.shtm

“[Business development coaching] will be

much more useful for some attorneys than

others. Coach an attorney with trait patterns

that align with strength in business

development, and you will likely see natural

success . . . On the other side, if the attorney

is more introverted and has a high fear of

rejection, the process will quickly become a

burden and the likelihood of any return on

the coaching investment will be low.”

http://www.ilw.com/articles/2011,0107-bodine.shtm


IV. Appendix

About JD Match

JD Match is the first online platform bringing together candidates for legal jobs—law students and lawyers—

with law firms and other legal employers. JD Match brings transparency, order and cost savings to a

system that has become opaque, chaotic and unjustifiably expensive.

The core premise of JD Match is to provide information that often is not available elsewhere. This

information can help legal employers, student-candidates and law schools make more thoughtful, rational

hiring decisions. JD Match offers powerful, flexible and user-friendly features, never before available, that

can improve upon current student recruiting practices.

About The Right Profile The Right Profile is a leader in talent selection & development systems. The Right Profile delivers

groundbreaking assessment and reporting applications that harness behavioral science, our patent-pending

people analytics engine and detailed, easy to use reports to help organizations make smarter personnel

decisions and develop each individual to their fullest potential. The Right Profile offers talent selection &

development systems for professional sports teams (including customers in the NFL®, MLB® & NBA®),

professional services firms and sales-driven businesses.

Services Available to the Legal Market Through the Sheffield Legal Assessment and The Right Profile’s people analytics engine, the following

services can now be delivered to the legal market to help increase “career fit” and reduce turnover and its

resulting high monetary and human costs:

• Help law firms achieve lower turnover by hiring candidates that fit better with the firm culturally, and

placing them in practice areas and roles where they are most likely to succeed and be happy

• Provide guidance as to the cultural compatibility between multiple law firms to better understand the

suitability and potential friction areas that might come to pass in a proposed merger

• Provide personalized development guidance to law firms to help them better mentor their attorneys

based upon each attorney’s unique mental makeup

• Provide personalized guidance to individual attorneys helping them navigate through common work

situations based upon their unique mental makeup

• Help law students and attorneys better understand themselves and their strengths, including

matching them to ‘good fit’ work environments and practice areas

• Advise college students whether a career in law is a good fit for them before incurring expensive

LSAT and tuition costs


Acknowledgements

The Right Profile offers special thanks to Jerry Long, Karl Schmitt and Greg Sarlo for their contributions to

the development of the Sheffield Legal Assessment and this research. We would also like to thank the

Chicago-Kent College of law, the Young Lawyers Section of the Chicago Bar Association, and Above the

Law for their publicity of the study. Finally, special thanks to Kevin Fong, Stephen Nimalasuriya and Chris

Sweeney for their tireless work and hundreds of hours of research & data verification.

assessing lawyer traits & finding a fit for...

Documents